People vs.

Boras (the counsel of the accused manner of examination of the victim

exercised excessive and insensitive must be tempered. Especially in this
questioning during cross-examination of a 6 case, since the child is only six years
year old rape victim. The judge handling the old who remains uncorrupted.
same because of his failure to admonish the • As to the second issue, the judge of the
lawyer for insensitivity is guilty of violating the trial court where the case was pending
New Code of Judicial Conduct) is deemed to have violated the Code of
Judicial Conduct when the insensitive
Facts: act or comment is made by a lawyer
• Boras invited his six-year-old neighbor, appearing in the court and the judge
Thea, to go with him. Thea joined him does not admonish the lawyer for the
since she was familiar with her insensitivity
neighbor. They went to a guava tree
near the coconut plantation. There,
Boras raped her. When Thea’s uncle
saw them, Thea ran away.Boras was
charged with rape. Pending trial, Boras
feigned to have lost his sanity. Thus, he
was admitted and examined by a
mental hospital which proved
otherwise. The trial court convicted
Boras of statutory rape on ground that
Boras was indeed not insane. Thus,
Boras filed this appeal.
• During the pendency of the case,
particularly the cross-examination of
six year old rape victim Thea, the
counsel for the accused Boras asked
Thea questions like At the time when
you were raped by Nolito Boras, was
his penis hard or soft?” or “Did you
see your Uncle Cerilo after the accused
Boras stop pushing and pulling his
penis to your vagina…?

Issue:
Was the way the counsel for the accused Boras
cross-examined the victim proper? Was the
judge during the trial guilty for violating the
New Code of Judicial Conduct?

Decision:
• As to the first issue, the Court ruled
that the way the counsel cross-
examined 6 year old Thea was
improper, and the questions asked
were deemed to be unnecessary,
uncalled for, and excessive queries. In
dealing with rape cases of children,
due care must be observed by the trial
court in handling the victim because
mishandling of victims may lead to
psychological imbalances.
• By subjecting her into explaining
whether she was forced or intimidated
is excessive. For proof of force and
intimidation is unnecessary in statutory
rape. Considering that there is a
medical report substantiating the
allegations made by the victim, the